I feel that the way the media portrays people is becoming somewhat comical. I must admit that I am a sucker for those trash tabloid magazines such as Us Weekly and People. However I take everything I read in these magazines with a grain of salt. These are plain and simple entertainment. There are sources we all know cannot and should not b e trusted and sources which we can rely on a bit more.
I doubt there are many people in this country unaware of who actress Angelina Jolie is. In what I observe about this particular celebrity is that she carries many associated words with her name, words such as “sex symbol” or “Mrs. Pitt”; but how far down if the word “activist”? I have read many articles in my beloved tabloid magazines regarding Angelina Jolie’s large number of children, mostly adopted, or her marriage to Brad Pitt, or articles about her body. The comical thing about all of these varieties of articles is how contradictive they are of one another.
For this blog I chose to compare the language between a tabloid magazine discussing Angelina Jolie’s marriage and the theory that it is “in trouble” and an interview she did in Time magazine raising awareness and assistance for the sad crisis in Cambodia, where she adopted one of her children.
In the tabloid article, the author described the status of Angelina Jolie’s marriage as tumultuous and portrayed the actress herself as a dark, bizarre, evil woman. This article was absolutely playing up to the entertainment value and trying to promote shock value. The language this author used was slick and quite immature in my opinion. The article was filled with words that are used in language today by teenagers and young adults. The article never once stated a fact, but continuously quoted an “anonymous source”. The fact of using an anonymous source allowed the person to be quoted word for word without requiring a check on how reliable and accurate their so-called personal accounts were.
The Time magazine on the contrary, was much more information filled. The language of the Time article was articulate, but fluent. The article described all of the great work Angelina Jolie has done for multiple third-world countries in crisis, the awareness she has raised about hunger and disease, and broke down the millions of dollars she herself has contributed to similar causes. The Time magazine article quoted only one person, Angelina, the person who the story was about, obviously a very reputable source. This article actually swayed my opinion of this woman and allowed me to see her as more than simply an actress. In my opinion, the power to sway an opinion is the sign of strong language and a powerful article.
Like I said, these tabloid magazines are simply entertainment and they aim for that revenue. But taking the time to compare articles with the same topic makes one compare the strength of the language and the assembly of the writing. I believe most people are very careful to not believe everything they read, I hope we can all learn to truly consider the source.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Reading your post was very interesting and enlightening and I also take what I read in tabloids with a grain of salt. In fact, I try my hardest to avoid reading them at all. Their lack of credibility alone is enough to turn me away from reading them. Unfortunately what you find in people hands is not the credible Time Magazine; rather it is the tabloids that people turn to for their information. Most of my peers, teenagers and young adults, would never dare to read Time Magazine, but they get all their information from the tabloids. Even the media on television has taken over them. They would rather watch TMZ or E! News, but watching lets say KCAL of NBC would absolutely kill them, and in my opinion it is a shame. Tabloids and the media over expose us to fictional and fantasy ideas about life and we are falling straight into their trap. People do not realize that what they read in tabloids is pure entertainment, and buy in on it as reality. Meanwhile big companies are cashing in on their malicious lies, and we are left believing Angelina Jolie is an evil bizarre woman.
ReplyDeleteShannon, first off, let me just say that this is not a condemnation on you or your values. You say that you are a sucker for “those trash tabloids… However I take everything I read with a grain of salt.” But as Khaliah Burnley said, “Meanwhile big companies are cashing in on their malicious lies”. I believe in the saying that if we are not part of the solution then we are part of the problem. These entities will keep existing as long as we give them our money, and apparently they are thriving. It’s good that you take all of this with a grain of salt, but I think the question that needs to be answered is; does it benefit society in any way to keep these media corporations afloat? Would we be better off without them? I think these are questions we each have to ask ourselves and then do what we feel is right. For example, I for one will not buy any music from a rapper (or any artist) who I believe is a detriment to the youth, or society, because he encourages an unhealthy philosophy, no matter how much I may like his music. The last thing I want to do is give anyone my money so he can get high ‘n slap his ho’ around and then sing about it… And then pay some more to read about it.
ReplyDelete